THIS ADDENDUM NUMBER FOUR (4) CLARIFIES AND MODIFIES RFP

							   RFP No. 102-7534-5


   THIS ADDENDUM NUMBER Six (6), CLARIFIES AND MODIFIES RFP #102-5031-
   5 ONLY TO THE EXTENT DESCRIBED HEREIN.

   Offerors shall acknowledge their acceptance of this Addendum by completing the
   section directly below this paragraph and submitting the original singed copy with
   their Proposal. Failure to do so may subject Offeror’s Proposal to rejection.


Offeror’s Company Name:                             __________________________________

Offeror’s Authorized Representative Name:           __________________________________

Signature of Offeror’s Authorized Representative: __________________________________

Date:                                                __________________________________


   Written requests for clarification or requests for changes or protests of a particular
   provision contained in this Addendum must be received by DAS no later than 5:00
   PM (Pacific Time) on March 29, 2007 or they will not be considered for response.

   ************************************************************************

   I. REQUESTS FOR CLARIFICATION AND CHANGES TO RFP

   1. The State of Oregon references Addenda #3 and #6. Both are not posted on ORPIN.
   Can the State of Oregon please provide instructions for respondents on how to proceed in
   reference to these addenda with this RFP pertaining? Are respondents required to sign
   and add them to the final proposal?

   Answer: Addenda #3 was issued to extend the closing date through the ORPIN
   system and did not require signature. Here is the addendum posted so far:

   Addendum #1:                 Addendum One (1) document posted 2/9/07
   Addendum #2:                 Addendum Two (2) document posted 3/2/07
   Addendum #2:                 Addendum Two (2), Revision 1: document posted
                                3/9/07
   Addendum #3:                 No document issued, extension information posted on
                                3/9/07
   Addendum #4:                 Addendum Four (4) document posted on 3/21/07
   Addendum #4:                 Addendum Four (4), Revision 1: document posted
                                3/21/07
   Addendum #4:                 Addendum Four (4), Revision 2: document posted
                                3/21/07
   Addendum #5:                 Addendum Five (5) document posted 3/23/07
Addendum #6:                  Addendum Six (6) Appendix A document posted on
                              3/26/07
Addendum #6:                  Addendum Six (6), Revision 1: Addendum Five (5)
                              document posted on 3/26/07 to change protest date for
                              Addendum 5 from 3/26/07 to 3/27/07.
Addendum #6:                  Addendum Six (6), Revision 2: Addendum Five (5)
                              document posted 3/27/07 to include extension of closing
                              date for the RFP.




2. The recent addendum #5 was posted on 3/23, revised on 3/26 and revised again on
3/27. The State has a due date of 3/27/07 at 5:00 p.m. for clarifying questions and
modification request which is less than 24-hours. We feel that the short timelines for
clarifications, modifications, and protest requests hinder the ability for respondents to
respond appropriately. Often times revisions must completely be completely reviewed.
Will the State of Oregon extend a reasonable amount of time to respond to addenda and
answers to questions in the future?

Answer: The only change to revision #2 to Addendum #5 posted on 3/27/07 was to
include the extension of the closing date from 3/27/07 to 4/4/07.


3. In reference to Appendix A: The state is requesting a separate pricing structure for
Oregon and WSCA. Can the State of Oregon please identify all WSCA contracts that
offer two different price points?

Answer: Please review Addendum #4, Section I, Question 5. The columns added to
Appendix A entitled OREGON and WSCA are not for different pricing but to allow
the Proposer to either choose to propose for Oregon only, WSCA only, or for both.
See Appendix A, Instructions for more detail.


4. What is the State of Oregon’s desired outcome of requesting a price structure for
Oregon and a different price for WSCA? Since WSCA contracts cross multiple states,
has the State of Oregon notified all potential WSCA participating states that pricing could
be lower in Oregon than that of all WSCA states who participate?

Answer: See response to Question #3


5- Please clarify the discrepancy between the two-price strategy request with Oregon and
WSCA in Attachment A with the State of Oregon’s Most Favored Price and Terms of
section 28.0 of the original RFP. Section 28.0 reads as follows:




                                             2
28.0 Most Favorable Prices and Terms

28.1 Contractor represents that all prices, terms and benefits offered to
the State under this Price Agreement are equal to or better than the
equivalent prices, terms and benefits being offered by Contractor to any
other State or local government unit or commercial customer.
28.2 Should Contractor, during the term of the Price Agreement, enter into
any contract, agreement or arrangement that provides lower prices, more
favorable terms or greater benefits to any other such government unit or
commercial customer, the Price Agreement shall be deemed amended to
provide the same price or prices, terms and benefits to the State and to
Authorized Purchasers purchasing under this Price Agreement. This
provision applies to comparable Goods and Services, and to purchase
volumes by the Authorized Purchaser that are not less than the purchase
volumes of the government unit or commercial customer that has received
the lower prices, greater benefits or more favorable terms.

Answer: Answer: See response to Question #3




                                           3